Karnataka High Court
Chief Secretary And Vigilance Officer vs Ksrtc & Bmtc United Employees Union on 22 November, 2011
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy
Bench: Ram Mohan Reddy
ORBER
Public -- Read Transport Carparatien,
fimpioyer, aggxieveé by the award éatad
Il}$&144/2OO§,0ftheIndusUfifl'Tfibum3L $a§gakgg%§.'
ailowing the reference ta set asicie»':'«§h::>._j'"§§rdér_._ dateci'
3.1.2008 imposing the punishme:.{E'*af ré <iucii'afi'_:df":§§{%fé
stages in the basic pay of v:re,<5;pongE'e'i1i .f::~1;":21.._peri(§d"0f'E>ne
year, has presented this petiffioii. "
2. Respondént in lmarijiage' ofié Umadevi of
Chun<::ha1'1a__ following the
perfoi:;_11a11ce V _ "*v_fI..4'-.€L'«T€'£"}Ti()1'I1}:€S in accordance
with Hitiqiu Vcii's_tdms.&"i¢311d traéitions. Since Umadevi
c0;::__3§;1'V not 3fi'ea1?E ___§§}}%1drer1 from out cf the wedigck,
.A __r'espa}:1cie:nf: to contract a secené marriage
$i:};a;i."_";§.'i;?{'3fashoda 9f fiommamahaiii Vfiiage in the
yeéé' .1§§23!!.a%*hG it is said gave firih E0 Ewe childmn 13:;
jufi@mev§fi§a ané Pgga an zsgazggg and 9.LE9§?
Aiigefifiectivsiy. Respandenf: nemmated his chfléren ':3
u H_ 1;_'e;c§ixze_ __'?5%_ Q5 thy: bgngfiia 33$ _ih€.pe'_t31;t;i@z}ez" 25% __ .-
of the RF, benefits without disciesing the name of the
:S€CO§1d wife. Respendeni did 33%. obtain permissian of
anquiry 31301 consented tea the documents produgztgfi by
the petitianer, marked as Exsfi/1.1 {:0 LM25, '.?%s'§;'§$YI1:..{§ :<Z"§r?';*§fl€
additienai issue was answered in the affir1I:4:$fi:ix%e}i<:$i£1iii§g
iihe enquiry as fair and proper.
4. Tbs Industrial Trib1__:g'1al 'hv_a5;'i:1g
facts of the case observed wife by
name Unzadevi €Xi€fi§éfl_ :a:1jd took a lead in
the matter of respondeifi igélcond marriage,
since the._ chiidren, from
out considered by the
"the respondent having not
0btaine d"-- _'f:i1t;' of the Corporation under Regiéfiaiien n16. _ef Aithe Reguiatiorzs, held that the .A §1;1j1131:111r3;6:fi:"i"~--.f.x;*as disproportionata {:0 the gravity 0;? 'af§§3cafi{i€i'§t [::'§:"G*+.red anfi acaamingiy by the award im§;;.gf:§d5 :sei asiée the orda:
55;. Leargzed 9312:2561 far' {Em getiiiamer paimris ta ' §I?;égiziat§0n 16 9f the Reguiafiems Ea comiend ihai in {ha """"'a:;'5ise'r3;c'é"50f ';3'%i0f..'pé%%f:i$1si0fi {mm the 'C0r§07r*aiicn, the ' bigameus marriage pmveé, the respandent eughi to 52% have been dflisrnissed fmm service, but a lenient-View was taken by impesing a minor punishment, wj'?iiCh}j'*':§i=3 Industrial Tribunal ought net to have i;1terfe*;i4§"<i H
8. Per cantra, kzamed couiqseli-'frag? tiaé '}:"é&',p'€};!fI€i_€'£}{' W'OI'k.I1'18.I1 seeks is sustain. tiie:.__awafd._ ii11pugi:i'€?;iv.35"E3_£2~ing . ' well merriteé, fuliy justificfg-.::_a:¢*:;g1 r.i{;t:T_:v .::a1Vviir;g far interference. .
7. éhe case suprag more the legally wedded wife jjf 3 statement: in the enquigjr. fihai to bear children, and took a 1€A;2::1 a1ef1'g_:Wii:}f;' oiiihéi: eiders in the famiiy to perfarrn §:h'{=: se¥:a:":::1:"i..Amarfiégé, fafiowing W1'1iCh§ "the sficond Wife :o ..~iW9 chiidrea from Quiz 8f the §R°?€&§.®€§'§g €0;;9;_Sti?;1;:\e',3':f1%gA reievami mafzeriah which ihe Sigcipfiinary &uih9:'i32'éy gughi is have €{}:E,}.SE&€F€@g Szinca ands?
" '-.R€-gfifiaiiafi 3%, the pegit§@:aer~CG:'p0raii@n in aréér :5:
-«permii 3. Corporatian servant 'ta carztract a ascend "1'.n"<3;.'i'%éx.gé§ must be sa"ci$fie'd, afiay an enquizjg, Hints éhé parsanai action of the Servant' in me faecfir 0f {fie
2 5: